From owner-freebsd-ports  Mon Oct 23 12:15:44 1995
Return-Path: owner-ports
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id MAA19376
          for ports-outgoing; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:15:44 -0700
Received: from silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU [136.152.64.181])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id MAA19363
          for <ports@freebsd.org>; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:15:40 -0700
Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU (8.6.12/8.6.9) id MAA02839; Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:14:43 -0700
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 1995 12:14:43 -0700
Message-Id: <199510231914.MAA02839@silvia.HIP.Berkeley.EDU>
To: jkh@time.cdrom.com
CC: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de, ports@freebsd.org
In-reply-to: <22570.814372215@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Subject: Re: Porters: Please shorten your "one line comments" a little if you can!
From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami)
Sender: owner-ports@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

I have been using COMMENT as "cat */pkg/COMMENT", that's why I
preferred to have the package name in there, and didn't complain about 
lines up to 79 characters.

But since the only "real" utilities (your sysinstall, John's script
for the web site) that read the COMMENT do so via the INDEX file, I am
not against removing the package names.

 * > Is this important for 2.1?  Does Satoshi give us a general permission
 * > to commit to these files right now?  Fixing it would be fairly easy.
 * 
 * Important for 2.1?  I guess that's up to Satoshi..  If he wants the
 * packages to look nice in the install menu, then yes.  If not, then no.

Well, when is the release date? :)

Note that if we change the COMMENT file, we need to rebuild the
packages.  I can do that, but it will take some time. :<

I'd rather hand-edit the INDEX file for the release, and leave this as
a "post-2.1" item....

Satoshi

P.S. I'm assuming you're reading the INDEX file, not the +COMMENT file 
     in the package itself....